​Liverpool have welcomed a major figure back into the fold following Michael Edwards’ shock departure. Edwards, who had been Liverpool’s sporting director from 2016 to 2022, returned to FSG as chief executive of football in early 2024. His return arrived with the aim of overseeing a multi-club project that, in truth, never materialised. FSG appeared to abandon plans to acquire additional football clubs, leaving Edwards feeling that the central promise of his role had not been fulfilled. Consequently, he stepped away, a development that will inevitably unsettle Liverpool given that he helped recruit many of the current key staff members.
Richard Hughes, the present sporting director who has known Edwards for more than two decades, was recruited by him in 2024. It is widely assumed that both Edwards and Hughes could depart the club before the end of 2026, suggesting a period of potential upheaval while Liverpool figures out the next structural step. The club now faces a crossroads: promote from within or bring in an external candidate. What FSG plans to do remains unclear, and the situation invites speculation about the future leadership of football operations at Anfield.
The Athletic provides a snapshot of the current situation, noting that one decision has already been made: Mike Gordon, FSG’s president and the executive who previously oversaw the football side before Edwards’ return, has resumed that role. This development offers a degree of continuity for the moment, even though Gordon had signalled an intention to step back. Edwards’ inability to secure a clearly defined role outside of the multi-club framework ultimately pulled him back in, at least for now.
Amid these executive shifts, the football calendar presses on with the January transfer window opening for business. Liverpool’s focus remains on recruiting elite talent, a process that is unlikely to be disrupted by the upheaval behind the scenes. It seems unlikely that the club will execute any sweeping structural changes during the window, and there is expectation that Hughes may eventually move on, potentially before a successor is named.
In terms of replacement strategy, Edwards’ departure does not automatically necessitate a direct replacement. On the surface, there is no active multi-club project to justify a dedicated overseer. Nevertheless, with Gordon reportedly seeking a reduced role, there may be a push to appoint someone to oversee the broader football strategy within FSG’s portfolio. In any case, someone will need to assume responsibility for higher-level decisions and for filling the gap left by Hughes if his tenure ends, and that responsibility is unlikely to fall to Edwards any time soon. The club will be watching closely to determine the best path forward, balancing continuity with the need for fresh leadership to guide Liverpool’s football operations in the post-Edwards era.